A modified landform development model for the topography of drained thermokarst lake basins in fine‐grained sediments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Permafrost degradation associated with the expansion of thermokarst lakes is commonly interrupted by catastrophic drainage. Subsequently, in tundra areas, permafrost aggradation in drained basins leads to uneven topography characterized by raised centres and wet, depressed margins. The genesis of such topography has been investigated in Old Crow Flats (OCF), a glaciolacustrine plain in the continuous permafrost of northern Yukon. The thermokarst lakes of OCF have a mean depth of only 1.5 m because excess ice is dominantly found only in the uppermost 10 m of the ground. Surface conditions were measured in three drained thermokarst lake basins, including relief, snow conditions, ground temperatures, near‐surface ground ice, and sediment stratigraphy. Four nearby lakes provided information on wave base, shore recession patterns, and bathymetry before drainage: the bottoms of these lakes were not raised in the centre. An elevation difference of up to 2 m was recorded between drained basin margins and centres but was not associated with variations in ice‐wedge density or segregated ice content. Hence basin topography was not controlled by differences in volumetric ground‐ice content between margins and centres. We propose that transport of fine sediment away from eroding lake margins during lake development is the primary mechanism for the genesis of depressed margins and raised centres in drained basins of OCF. Over time, the transport results in the deposition of more and finer sediment in the central parts of lakes, where the lake bottom has subsided below wave base, than at the shallow margins, where resuspension by wave action occurs frequently. This difference in sediment volume is revealed in the topography after drainage, when permafrost aggrades in the lake‐bottom sediment and underlying talik. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".